RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 19 charted matches · 2014–2021

Guido Pella

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.3% ±2.8 raw 60.9% · tour 63.4% · 1,485 points
Return points won 38.1% ±2.9 raw 37.6% · tour 36.6% · 1,521 points

Serve and return points won, refitted against every opponent at once so a record built on weak or strong opposition is put on the same scale. Career, all surfaces, with a 90% margin. Raw is the plain share of points won.

Value per 100 shots

Direction choice −0.12 ±0.12 better than 27% of ATP · raw −0.11
Shot selection +0.17 ±0.20 better than 71% of ATP · raw +0.18
Execution −0.13 ±0.51 better than 60% of ATP · raw +0.01
Tactical adaptability −0.09 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 18 matches
Adaptation speed +0.07 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.77 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 33% of ATP

Points gained per 100 shots compared with an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for the strength of the opponents faced, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Raw is before the opponent adjustment. Built on 8,055 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Guido Pella goes on to win after each option in the positions they face most often, shrunk toward tour average when the sample is small. Showing the 8 most-used options; teal marks the best one with at least 30 shots.

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 605 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 44.3%±5.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 31% 42.4%±5.7 43.7%
BH down the line 7% 43.8%±10.5 46.4%
FH inside-in 6% 43.5%±11.0 54.7%
FH inside-out 4% 49.7%±12.3 51.8%
BH slice through the middle 4% 41.0%±12.2 35.1%
FH through the middle 4% 50.1%±12.7 45.2%
BH slice down the line 3% 34.5%±13.0 37.1%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 449 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 55% 48.6%±5.0 46.6%
FH through the middle 22% 38.6%±7.3 41.5%
FH down the line 17% 53.6%±8.4 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 3% 16.9%±10.4 24.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 442 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 31% 47.8%±6.5 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 53.3%±8.1 47.0%
FH down the line 18% 53.8%±8.2 51.5%
BH through the middle 14% 44.5%±8.9 46.8%
BH crosscourt 12% 37.8%±9.5 49.1%
FH crosscourt + approach 2% 73.2%±13.3 69.9%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 364 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 41% 44.2%±6.2 48.0%
BH through the middle 26% 43.2%±7.7 43.8%
BH down the line 9% 43.7%±11.4 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 7% 38.4%±11.7 35.1%
FH inside-in 5% 50.9%±13.2 54.3%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 34.6%±13.6 42.1%
BH slice down the line 3% 29.5%±13.5 35.8%
FH inside-out 3% 55.1%±14.9 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +4 How much less varied Guido Pella's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 146 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 35% 39% 66% / 73%
Body 11% 6% 67% / 63%
T 54% 55% 68% / 75%

724 normal · 33 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 64% ▲ 67% / 73%
Body 7% 11% 66% / 63%
T 46% 26% ▼ 71% / 72%

593 normal · 113 break-point 1st serves

Is the serve mix in equilibrium?

Game theory says a well-mixed server wins equally often with every direction they use. If one direction wins more, it's underused and points are being left behind. This is the minimax test Walker and Wooders ran on Wimbledon finals, applied to every charted first serve. Win rates include faults. "Optimal" allows for returners reading a habit. No measurable response (−0.05 ± 0.15 points per 100 serves for every 10 points of habitual usage), measured from ATP servers whose mix drifted between matches. Shifts stay within the range servers' habits actually vary, the only range that response was measured over.

Deuce court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide35% 57.7%±4.7 n=266 33% ▼
Body10% 63.9%±7.6 n=79 0% ▼
T54% 59.5%±3.8 n=412 67% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.42).
Optimal mix: +0.1 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 62.9%±4.1 n=352 56% ▲
Body8% 64.0%±8.7 n=53 0% ▼
T43% 61.6%±4.4 n=301 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.86).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.15 points per 100 first serves What the optimal mix would win over the current one, both courts. More exploitable than 100% of ATP servers. Tested on matches they weren't fitted on, ATP mixes picked this way win 0.33 per 100 first serves on average.

Repeating the previous direction to the same court: +0.8±4.0 points per 100 against switching. Negative means returners read repeats. Tour-wide, repeating costs women about 0.4 points per 100 and costs men nothing, so men's returners don't measurably anticipate direction. (542 repeats, 883 switches.)

Return by serve direction

Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 39 36% −0.6±9.5
1stAd courtT 227 30% +2.1±4.7
1stAd courtWide 185 32% +4.5±5.2
1stDeuce courtBody 39 41% +3.9±9.7
1stDeuce courtT 214 26% +1.0±4.6
1stDeuce courtWide 247 24% −3.3±4.2
2ndAd courtBody 99 56% +6.3±7.2
2ndAd courtT 108 51% +1.3±7.0
2ndAd courtWide 62 53% +4.4±8.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 96 48% −0.8±7.3
2ndDeuce courtT 69 51% +1.7±8.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 124 50% +2.2±6.6

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Guido Pella's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.8% · won 63% · −1.2±9.9 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 61% · −3.0±10.3 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 58% · −5.6±10.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 58% · −6.0±9.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 2.0% · won 54% · −9.9±11.2 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.0% · won 51% · +10.9±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.2% · won 47% · +7.5±10.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.1% · won 46% · +6.3±10.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → BH direction unknown used 2.4% · won 48% · +8.1±11.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.3% · won 45% · +5.2±11.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.6% · won 54% · +7.2±6.5 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.7% · won 57% · +9.7±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 52% · +4.9±8.2 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → FH through the middle used 2.0% · won 54% · +6.8±10.2 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 51% · +4.1±7.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Guido Pella wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.2% · won 55% · +7.9±9.4 vs own baseline · +10.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jaume Munar (6/12), Roberto Bautista Agut (5/8)
  2. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.1% · won 54% · +7.4±9.6 vs own baseline · +4.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Dominic Thiem (6/14), Jaume Munar (5/11)
  3. BH crosscourt → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 55% · +7.6±10.6 vs own baseline · +11.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jaume Munar (5/8)
  4. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 55% · +8.2±12.5 vs own baseline · +7.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 53% · +6.0±10.8 vs own baseline · +4.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jaume Munar (4/7)
  6. FH through the middle → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 53% · +6.1±11.0 vs own baseline · +13.1 vs tour on the same sequence

Strengths and vulnerabilities

Value per 100 shots compared with the average player hitting (strengths) or facing (vulnerabilities) the same shot. Only shot types seen at least 120 times.

Hurts opponents most with

BH to the middle · return +1+1.6120
BH to their forehand · return +1+1.3129
Wide 1st serve · ad court+1.2339
FH to the middle · return+1.2283
BH to the middle · return+0.9314

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · return−2.5125
BH to their backhand · return−2.5144
BH to the middle · return−2.2276
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.9190
FH to their backhand · rally−1.6767

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Miomir Kecmanovic, Andy Murray, Joao Fonseca, Bernard Tomic, Albert Ramos

Tactical fingerprint

Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.

1st serve in67%
T serves · deuce54%
Avg rally length4.8
Forehand share58%
Through the middle28%
Deep returns32%
T serves · ad43%
Drop shots / shot2.1%
Chipped returns18%
Wide serves · ad50%
Run-around forehands16%
Backhand slice17%
Serve & volley1%
Points at net8%
Unforced errors / shot8.4%
Point-ending shots18.6%
Wide serves · deuce35%
FH down the line24%
BH down the line11%

Plays most like

  1. Gael Monfils 2005–2026 plan v
  2. Mackenzie Mcdonald 2015–2025 plan v
  3. Daniel Elahi Galan 2020–2025 plan v
  4. Miomir Kecmanovic 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Juan Martin Del Potro 2007–2022 plan v
  6. Nuno Borges 2021–2026 plan v
  7. Roberto Bautista Agut 2013–2026 plan v
  8. Alex Molcan 2022–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Andrei Pavel 1999–2006
  2. Michael Chang 1989–1998
  3. Magnus Norman 2000–2001

Charted matches